The AWFUL Marketing of 'BABYLON' 

Quite so. Now I wanna stream it out of curiosity, when i was a bout to give it a pass

@@Cancoillotteman I LOVED THIS MOVIE

Fr I didn't wanna watch it until now

the markeing shows them as actors being actors at a time when we people do not like actors.

Lowkey looking up movie times now

Brad Pitt and Margot Robbie have never been big draws

@@jojotwice8918 what are you smoking?

@@rayaneali7239 😂😂

Like Tarantino and Mackie said, "there's no such thing as movie stars anymore"

This only works in Bollywood

just don't say anything not nice to them.

I totally agree, younger people start using a phrase, then suddenly there's advertising using it to sell their products to youth. I remember it when "Wazzup" was popular where I am, then seeing it on adverts and cringing almost to death. And when "bruh" got popular there was an insurance ad with guys saying "bruh" to each other

They were making memes from the movie as though everyone already knew and loved the film and would get the reference.

@@MrJeffcoley1 ​ ​ No one got a single reference because no one cared to watch it even after seeing the trailer that trailer gave me impression that it would be a money grab nothing meaningful about it and I was right those who watched it said it was a waste of time. The trailer to once upon a time was brilliantly crafted while this one was horrible.

IF I have to bet, this was made with AI

Saw Amsterdam on Disney+ and thought it was Babylon for ages so yeah this was me lol

I kept getting the two movies confused with each other1

I wonder why Robbie chose to work on both projects. It seems like she’s established enough to turn some things down.

I did! I saw the trailer a few times too and never understood the trailer. Amsterdam looked very boring, predictable and unfunny. Confused why she’s taking these boring ass roles.

That would complicate things, although I did enjoy Amsterdam (even with the slow start to the story). I do think A was marketed better.

I do not know how they omitted that?!

I think that using Rotten Tomatoes as a way to portray the movie's quality was really disingenuous and kinda lame. Because on other websites like IMBD and Filmaffinity the movie is rated way higher, around 7.5 and 8/10. And it is an amazing movie. But the fact that the dude only used Rotten Tomatoes makes me think he did in bad faith, just to hammer the idea of the bad marketing campaign, as if the audience's appreciation the movie is somehow a reflection of the marketing campaign and not the quality of the movie.

I love Damien Chazelles work and I didn't even know he was behind this!

It would be like marketing Inception as "From Christopher Nolan" rather than "From the director of The Dark Knight" when he didn't have the reputation he does today.

What if it was a deliberate choice from Damien Chazelle, who wanted for the movie to stand on its own ?

Good point. That could have made a difference.

Yup

Spielbergs movie also flopped names don’t even matter anymore and it’s sad

@@LUCCI_25 I didn’t really hear about Spielberg’s latest film until it was nominated for a bunch of awards, so marketing failed that film. I guess they assumed since it’s a Spielberg film everybody will know about it and show up, which didn’t happen.

In the UK they definitely did mention those things when they marketed it, and I've been seeing posters and ads everywhere (including out of home stuff, so it's not just that Google and RU-vid know I'm a film fan and a Chazelle fan) I still had no idea what the film was about until I looked it up though

what's that line from?

Yes they do!

@@yeahsuredude7082 some actress said it on a podcast iirc. Forget who.

Same

You 100% nailed, I'd bet all my $$$ that is exactly what happened. Sad, b/c I loved the movie. Literally never heard of it, it just popped up on Paramount + and I gave it a shot.

I didn’t see this movie advertised on TikTok at all.

That’s bc his PR team is trying to give him as much press as possible to cover his abuse mess

I haven’t seen this movie but my theory on these highly marketed movies with big stars (often with ensemble casts but not always), is that they are made to funnel lots of money to big stars for easy performances, probably as a favor for those stars doing projects they don’t like. Margot Robbie didn’t want to do Amsterdam? Pay her $8 mil for 6 weeks of work on Babylon. Brad Pitt doesn’t want to do the next blockbuster for Warner Bros? Give him $10 mil for 3 weeks of work on Babylon. The studio is probably more invested in those other movies succeeding than they might be in Babylon, and they expect Babylon to flop, but they market the movie nonstop to simply recoup the money they’ve put into it, and even if they don’t recoup their money on Babylon, they may expect to recoup their money on the projects they actually want these stars acting in.

That happens a lot and it probably won’t change anytime soon

@@zachsdickDOTmpgthat's a pretty good theory, but like won't the actors still not wanna do Babylon either? Why can't they just pay the actors more on the projects they want those actors on?

​@@gianna.luddington7958 his what?

Definitely. There are already some very intense fans of it.

i personally didn’t have high hopes of it being good after seeing the reviews but i was actually very pleasantly surprised! I mean i can definitely see that it has some shortcomings but it was still an amazing experience

I don't think it's THAT good. It's good but not that good.

Lol

@@therealpatrickbateman5000 you’re half the box office

I agree with your agreement!

He also marketed the movie very well though it doesn’t matter I guess no one’s going to watch it

I heard about it but then forgot. I had to google it when I saw this video. Back when I first saw the trailer I remember thinking it would flop. Noboody is interested in the 1920's anymore. And the trailer was confusing.

Same here. It certainly puts it ahead of their marketing.

I don’t see how. I saw ads for this movie all over RU-vid and constantly saw commercials on tv. My guess is you don’t have cable or dish anymore.

​@@btgkg9639 You are correct. I'm online & using discs for my media. If the marketing dept. was worth the money they spent on them, their social media and online presences would have gone viral and we all would have at least had an opinion on going to see the movie. Instead, they apparently had those derivative and dull things that I first saw in this video.

"What's the movie about?" "It has Margot Robbie in it." "What's it about?" "Check out these horns! Look, they're having a party!" "K, so, what's it about?" "There's gonna be sex in it." "..." Honestly, if they're gonna try to rely on Star power to attract viewers, you'd think they'd get some internet celebrities that are more relevant.

To be honest, I'd be hard pressed to tell you, and I've seen the actual movie.

@@richardhollis3783 OMG 😭

I mean if you think about it, this movie does not have an active plot with proactive characters who further the story. It's a succession of different events that happened to them throughout time, so in that regard is very difficult to encapsulate the premise in a trailer. They are passive characters, so you are left witnessing the madness u fold before you, but you are not necessarily following anybody's journey. I love this movie, it has a lot of soul and heart poured into it, which is refreshing nowadays, but it did not have that clear, driven plot of Whiplash and La la land. You knew the characters' goals and desires and saw them go through an actual arc.

I would love to hear more of your thoughts on this!! Like how so/what other things have u seen that show this

@@panmoncada7257 empire of Light, bablyon, bardo a false chronicle, fablemens, ansterdam(sort of) were all love letters to (mostly old)Hollywood or filmmaking---probably with the start of the pandemic a lot of these directors looked inwards for inspiration while the world was shut down or maybe thought this will be their last Film based on the worlds circumstances

I think that was the point. At least it made you think. And that’s memorable.

Yeah, felt the same way, but JUST about the premise. I never really care about movies about Hollywood. They’re such a bore for me - except the disaster artist ofc lol

i mean, chazelle didn't have a lot of kind things to say in this movie about Hollywood either. he basically said "i love making movies, i love art and magic of cinema, but i hate the industry and everyone here is fucked up, we just pretend like we didn't sell our soul, and i question if it was even worth it."

You're a soldier?

@@anyaaa2801 sailor actually but yeah

@@anyaaa2801 Quick tip, if you're asking someone if they served in the military, ask: "were you in the military?" or "did you serve?" "Soldiers" are US Army and only US Army. The Air Force, Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard don't have soldiers and will mentally make fun of you, even if they're outwardly polite.

I had a similar experience! I turned it on, thinking I would skip through a bit to watch Margot Robbie cry on cue, but I couldn't look away. I was surprised that I really enjoyed it!

Interestingly, James Cameron’s still does 😳

I don't even know who Spielberg's modern audience is honestly

I think people are starting to realise a name is just a name

@@raydromeda3777 except when it’s Jordan Peele…

That's just how it is. Gen z and alpha haven't necessarily grown up with certain names like Millennials and Gen X did. The same way Millennials and Gen X might not have cared about directors from the 40s-60s.

Agreed

Yup, it's huge in London. Really cool ad on the side of the buses

same with australia - billboards everywhere

Same here in Manchester

I visited Paris and it was the same there

To me this was one of the biggest flaws. As a watcher of the movie or trailer, I can't create a world. Every time I see 1928 on the screen I'm expecting to see things from that period. But so many things take me out of that period bc they aren't historically accurate. This is okay for minor aspects but not for the main character.

“Arnold Schwarzenegger. Sylvester Stallone. Down in The Abyss. Coming to a theater near you!”

I will never miss voice-over guy, or "in a world" guy, as we used to call him

but its nice to have vagueness so u can enter the story without anticipating the outcome

So you miss bad trailers with a lazy voice-over saying uncreative things? Ok.

no the voiceovers were TERRIBLE

Agreed. I personally had my own problems with the story but I think it deserved to be seen by many.

BR:2049 was boring though. And too long.

@@CATDHD That was a film that looked great and had a perfect rhythm. Not like this mess.

@@CATDHD BladeRunner 2049 was a great film. It explored themes of humanity and despair in a Pinocchio-like way while still managing to be unique and connect back to the original film. It also had exceptionally written dialog.

@@ssssssstssssssss any dystopic setting with a fucking good retirement program ruins the cyberpunk movie. That's a major sin of the movie - too self-serious, without good worldbuilding. Another one I attribute to Denis Villeneuve - his obsession with long shots that are mesmerizing, but overshadows the tempo of the story, which is flawed without good cruel editing, with needless characters like Leto's. Take his arc out and just mention the gist in a dialogue and you won't lose anything. Tonally, the movie is great. Thats one of Villeneuve's strong sides. Had the movie been 30-40 minutes shorter, just like Ridley Scott wanted, it would have been much better digested. Compare BR:2049 with a similar movie that deals with trauma - You were never really here. Villneuve should really learn to be ruthless in the editing room, or just hire Margaret Sixel.

I go to the movies weekly and saw this trailer before every single movie I saw for about 9 months. It was annoying and really turned me off to the movie. It was overly advertised.

Yup! Missed opportunity for sure

One reviewer, Brad Jones, described the movies as if "Singing in the Rain" was directed by the same guy as "Caligula", and that's why he loved it.

I cant believe that’s what this movie is about. I thought it was some bold indie darling when it could have just as easily been lumped together with the Oscar Bait?

that was one of the reasons I didn't go see it, because I get triggered with heavy focuses on coke specifically, only to find out it's only in one major scene lmaoo

Honestly, the debauchery isn’t even what sticks out the most. Of course, it does stick out, but the characters, the story and the cinematography left more of an impact than the wild party scenes.

No doubt it wins for best original score

@@ComeWatchTV and for Production design

The score was beautiful no doubt but it felt too similar to LaLaLa Land, which might have been the point now that I think about it lol. Still wish it had an original score to set it apart .

Margot Robbie sucks

@@ComeWatchTV It *would* deserve this!

"I actually havent seen any other movie by this director, but watching it it felt like La La land. And i havent even seen Lala land" made me lose a few brain cells

@@vertabun427 i havent seen the movie itself but ive seen alot of content on it on youtube. Alot of it being cinematography of la la land.

go watch lalaland and whiplash, they are both a lot of fun and really good movies believe me.

Exactly, release it in October/November. Show a trailer about the roaring 20's and the introduction of sound. Make it a nostalgic period piece that needs to be seen on the big screen.

It's margots hair and makeup, I don't want to watch the movie based on the trailer because I will spend the entire time being mad about costuming

@@bedtimeat8 okay i went to go watch the movie and I’ll say this, I thought the exact same thing it pissed me off BAD how much she looks like she’s from a different decade, however this is one of those movies were you can tell the director purposely did stuff like that as a “stylistic choice” to “make a statement” becasue, there is a lot of….not necessarily “inaccurate” things that happen, more so, unlikely, but chazelle I think does this as a choice to make a point about the movie industry or sum shit idk but yeah i agree her wardrobe could’ve been better, since her character is supposed to be this crazy drug fueled wild child, and there were a lot of girls like that in the 20’s but they didn’t look a hot mess, at least not in the way she did

*set

Who was that trailer for ? Gives no clues to what it is whatsoever. 😬

I liked it a lot too. I only heard about it from a friend who is a big movie buff!

I am so curious what y’all liked about it? My bf and I watched it, and while there were some scenes/parts that we both enjoyed, we felt like those were ruined by the overwhelming number of scenes that were repetitive and didn’t add anything to the characters/story, the lack of direction, as well as the lack of a meaningful story arc/conclusion/character development for most of the characters. by the time we finished, we were both just feeling very frustrated 😅

@@AnnDemeerme and my boyfriend saw it when it was first out, and we came out the cinema and was like that was good! Then we walked to the car and it was like well…except for this part, and this, and that. I love a film where not much happens, but I genuinely feel like there was no cohesive story, like it felt like a clip show of ‘impressive shots’ just stuck together

@@AnnDemeer I really enjoyed the scenes of them filming all those movies at the same time in the desert, while racing the sun. I also think its interesting that Brad Pitt played a movie "star" becoming irrelevant when he might be one of the last movie stars on earth. I think the concept of movie star in general isn't relevant anymore with how much media there is to consume. Def didn't need to be 3 hrs lol

I saw it and I would definitely recommend it because it speaks to the good and bad of Hollywood. It doesn't so much focus on the glamour of Hollywood but the sheer chaos, racism, desperation, and confusion that propelled the medium. Many period piece films that focus on this decade or the 50's and 60's all possess the quality of idealizing a society where many people suffered and only one propel. This movie for me completely dispel's that notion. It does showcase the transition into "talkies" and the excitement that follows suit but it shows the realities of living in the early 20th century.

It's literally the opposite of a love letter to Hollywood. It is a love letter to cinema but not hollywood

@@arthurloub5752 I'm tired of the "love letter to cinema" trend too.

​​@@redlightmax Seriously, is there any creative medium that is more obsessed with itself than film? Are there anywhere near as many songs about songwriting, novels about writing novels (okay I realize that takes out 90% of Stephen King's output but bear with me) or comics about making comics as there are movies about making movies? Some degree of reflection on the medium from people who love it and dedicate their lives to it is inevitable, and it has on occasion led to great work provided that the reflection on the medium and industry in-jokes aren't the sole thrust of the work. "Misery" for instance isn't just as meditation on the writing process and the contentious relationship popular creators have with their fanbases (Annie Wilkes being the ultimate case of a parasocial relationship gone haywire long before that term entered the popular lexicon) but a genuinely tight thriller that still has the power to make people wince. "All That Jazz" isn't just Broadway legend Bob Fosse all but telling all, but him trying to get to the bottom of why he was the workaholic trainwreck that he was while also being a genuinely great musical with outstanding singing and choreography almost becoming a Broadway answer to Fellini's "8½" by the end. So many "love letters to to cinema" are nothing but love letters to cinema, with nothing to offer to any audience other than film industry workers who want to revel in how good they used to have it before RU-vid and premium TV ate their lunch. I love cinema too, but I love it for the potential it has to tell great stories, and using it to tell stories about how great movies used to be of how great it used to be to go to the movies instead of using it to make movies that are actually great and great to go to is wasting that medium. None of the great filmmakers attained that status by making movies about how great movies used to be.

It was a mediocre film, the type of movie film bros would like, or feel like they _have_ to like.

Yeah, it didn't exactly hurt the whole Stepford Wives, Florence Pugh is the only normal one, angle.

And the movie was absolute shit.

Yeah, the pacing of that whole sequence was great. I hear a lot of negative reception around the movie, but personally I loved it, it was entertaining, and I enjoyed the ending.

Agreed, the film aged me a bit

I think the scenes in which characters explain points which are already being shown by the narrative (Spolier: Brad Pitt suddenly going on a rant about how movies are not a lesser art to his theater actress wife after his best friend dies), could have been cut

didnt mind the length but certainly didnt need to be 3 hours long

like the one tobey maguire sex dungeon scene, what the fuck was that. That actually threw the whole entire movie off the rails for no reason, or that stupid snake scene, i rather watch a youtube apology video compilation than that sequence

@@bartoletondiaz6920 i wanna watch the movie but then im scared of seeing stuff like that lol

Bugs me too because the transition to talkie movies is a time period I love but the movie could have been set nowadays and be the same

It does? The movie spans like 15 years

​@grosvnermcaffrey9862 the movies whol point is the 15 year transitions in movie throughout that wra

Yes. Not only was it tasteless-it was irritating! Agreed

haha

Me too. I was waiting for the next Chazelle's film, but I only heard the movie by looking up the post saying Babylon loss so much. Still I went to the cinema to watch this great film, my personal favorite.

There was no one but my three friends in babylon when I went

Omg!That’s brilliant idea! Even if I watch the movie from this angle and concentrated on Manny, his feelings and story it will be much more sense and deeper feeling. And all the promotions are almost about Nelly

What do you mean by not really ?

If the marketing team shared your enthusiasm it may have been a hit. I wouldn't be surprised if someone stuffed up the contracts and gave too big a share of the US box office to someone so they did their best to tank it. Then they go and try to make some money in Europe and from Netflix.

I can see the french really liking this movie

i think people will notice it more and more over time it was a pretty good movie, when I went to see it there were 2 other people in the theater with me its just a lot of people had no idea this movie existed

pretty meh to me.

I think the length kind of made sense near the end, but there were so many scenes that could’ve been taken out. Toby McGuire did a good job in his cameo but that scene was sooooo unnecessary

You should see it. I’m pretty mixed on it, some things I loved, some things I hated, but I know some people really like it

Thank you! I agree with your theory about negative commentary videos. I like making positive videos more anyways, so I’m cool with them not blowing up

I think you still have to make it seem like more than it is if you are making a trailer. Even if it is a lot of nothing, with how much they probably shot for the movie it would be pretty easy to make a better trailer even with a somewhat manufactured story

I'm not surprised because who wants to watch a film about silent movies? Sounds boring as hell

@@theponsway ignorant child

@@theponsway the whole film industry switching from silent to talking movies is a pivotal event in art history, nothing about it is boring.

@@theponsway I think the filmmakers realized the potential validity of this perspective and, rather than give the film a more crisp plot, they decided to sex it up beyond all recognition

I knew nothing when I sit in the cinema and in the first minute an Elephant shit in my face. :) True enough in the first hour hour there were beautiful cinema moments I almost cried it was so good but it got ruined for me completely. Just too long, too pointless, and too many discusting scenes. A good trailer can get you a good opening weekend but word of mouth is still the most important I think, and I can tell you I recomment to all my friends to stay away from this one.

I agree. It just seemed to advertise "woo wacky decadance so funnnnn" and I just don't care lol

Yep. It wasn't bad marketing, it's clearly just a bad movie and the big selling point was parties and orgies and Hollywood decadence. No one cares. Not interested. Margot Robbie dancing around in skimpy attire, who cares. Make a good movie. Hollywood making movies about Hollywood is usually self indulgent crap.

Appreciate it!

I feel it's not doing great in Finland because of this. Marketing has been lacklustre.

Yup

Bingo, yes it is.

It wasn't that good. it's getting Oscar buzz because it is undeniably great from a technical standpoint.

disagree. It‘s one of the few movies in nearly 10 years that made me laugh out loud, cry, be lowkey scared and clap at the end. Fuck the marketing. This movie is absolutely stunning, not only from a technical standpoint, but also story wise. In fact, it was the first time in my life I actually noticed a feedback from the audience in the theatre.

Hard to believe that the TOP GUN sequel was more deserving of a nomination for Best Picture!

@@ComeWatchTV Art is subjective. I think it was easily deserving, and a top five film for the year. (I'd also have given Chazelle a second Oscar...) Would it have gotten the nomination with better marketing? Hard to say. It had mixed reviews and is clearly a love it or hate it film. The Academy does tend to reward passion though, so if enough voters loved it it maybe would've had a shot. Granted, a Tomato score that low is... well, it's lower than Joker.

@@Blaqjaqshellaq Why is that hard to believe? People generally loved the movie and they called it even better than the original, it was also adored by the critics. Even those people who don't watch these kind of movies flocked to the theatres to watch it, it was like an euphoria. Maybe, the movie is not your thing but considering the fact that it didn't got nominated for best actor or best director, one thing no one can deny that it certainly deserved Best Picture nomination.

Typo! Just a heads up

They should have had one trailer where it was a trailer cut like a 1920's trailer, another one that's a teaser of the star power but introducing the new actor Diego Calva, with Damien Chazelle's name all over - la la land, whiplash, first man. A third and final trailer, basically cut like the Gatsby Trailer, but raw and trashy and wild. The Babylon trailer was cut like a comedy but we don't have any idea what's happening. They are rich and drunk? Margot Robbie has also played women with psychological or mental issues a few times now, so that's also on the nose.

@@snuffspoon thank you!

That definitely wouldn’t have gone viral tho.

The “me when I drink” Pitt trailers were definitely a poor choice, given the discussions on his history. That was what turned me off the film the most, it wouldn’t have been much to pull that strand of marketing and it wouldn’t have felt so tone deaf

What did he do?

@@immanuelcunt7296 It’s alleged he drunkenly attacked Angelina Jolie and their children

@@immanuelcunt7296 court documents came out recently about his extensive abuse toward Angelina Jolie. they got into a very heated argument during a plane ride where she kept asking him to stop drinking (I believe in especially in front of their children) and he started getting physically aggressive with her. one of her kids had to get between him to defend their mom, Angelina, and brad hit them on the face. he was drunk during the fight too. but this was known years ago, she wrote an article about it right after they started legal proceedings for their divorce.

@@mus7c is this alleged or proven?

appreciate it

Snake scene was hilarious 😂

I liked the snake scene too

I was laughing so hard, I liked the scene too.

Yeah, I watched the trailer and thought “rich people partying? I’ve seen that enough.”

The movie isn't really about that tho, there's some really good scenes critizing the Hollywood system

That's a very limited perspective of what the movie is.

@@saratheweird4171 That wasn't in the trailer though, and that was part of the problem. I also am sick of these kinds of movies, and even being a Chazelle fan I thought the trailer looked god awful and the negative reviews further deterred me. I thought it was another Hollywood celebrates Hollywood thing with big parties.

@@crepperwlp that’s the majority of the movie, the rest is people trying to get/hold on to relevancy

Thank you!!!

this is exactly the impression i got, too!

I thought it might be the 60s-70s (a period I generally dislike), had no idea it was the 1920s.

Appreciate that. Thank you!